Re: XC & IB 3.2 overlapping siblings
Re: XC & IB 3.2 overlapping siblings
- Subject: Re: XC & IB 3.2 overlapping siblings
- From: Erik Buck <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
Don't overlap sibling views. Even though it works reliably now, it is still a poor practice for controls and has a definite user interface "smell."
If you must use the same area of the user interface for different purposes at different times, consider using a tab view with no visible tabs and programmatically changing which subview of the tabview is visible.
However, you should reconsider your user interface design. When the user interface changes based on application "mode" and buttons appear, disappear, change size or title, etc., users are confused. Such interfaces are not "discoverable." How is a user supposed to know that a different button will appear in some circumstances? How does the user know what options are sometimes available but aren't available now? Users are frustrated when they remember that there used to be a handy button and now it isn't there.
User interface elements that are not currently applicable should be disabled but not hidden. If different interfaces are needed for different application modes, use established conventions like tab views and disclosure areas. Instead of changing a button to reflect application mode, allow the user to control the change of application mode by deliberately selecting a different tab or expanding a disclosure area or pressing a "next" button. Users should be in control, and every user interface change should have a cause that is obvious to the user.
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden